Hacker News Reader

It seems that Raju Kosuri was not naturalized but a permanent resident, while is wife was naturalized but because she came by this scheme she agreed to have her naturalization revoked because it was received fraudulently.

  https://www.google.co.il/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/local/public-safety/va-man-behind-20-million-visa-fraud-faces-deportation-after-prison-sentence/2017/12/22/61007138-e729-11e7-833f-155031558ff4_story.html

Legal student here. To answer your question - current international human rights treaties / laws prevent revocation of citizenship (even naturalized citizenship) if that would leave the person stateless.

Edit: and yes, India, only allows single-citizenship. Accepting U.S. citizenship automatically results in the loss of Indian citizenship.

"Automatic" is not always so automatic.

Not sure about India, but in other countries this "automatic revocation" is neither automatic nor permanent (believe it or not)

Also, given it is not a requirement by the US that the recipient give up their other citizenships, they don't care about the other country knowing about it

>>Not sure about India

Not had this experience to comment on this first hand.

But as an Indian, I guess they ask you to surrender your Passport at the Indian embassy, and then ask you to apply for a PIO(Person of Indian origin) card.

How does the Indian government know that a person has another citizenship?

I think one way is taxes. But I guess there will be some sharing of databases.

On the other hand, I think, putting your US citizenship on risk for maintaining a illegal status would not make sense for a lot of people.

One way is when we enter India at borders, they check out exit dates in system. Usually people who are still indians would have US's some kind of visa. US Citizens will not be able to show any US visa.

There are heavy fines for not self surrendering the indian passport after US Citizenship within 6 months.

From what I've read, the Citizenship Act of India specifies that any citizen of India who obtains citizenship of any other country immediately ceases to be a citizen of India. At that point, it is his or her duty to surrender their passport to the nearest Indian mission abroad.

I guess that one could ignore this and keep on using their Indian passport - but doing so would be fraud and criminal misrepresentation.

My Indian passport says:

    WARNING
    If holder acquires Nationality 
    of another country, he should 
    Surrender This Passport 
    forthwith to the nearest Indian 
    Mission/Post Abroad. Un-
    authorized possession of this 
    Document shall Constitute an 
    Offence Punishable under 
    the Indian Passport Act 1967

India has a provision for previous citizens to apply to, called the OCI. You can reside in India, but you give up the right to vote and own agriculture land.

On the topic of dual citizenship, I'm always surprised at these deportations of American citizens.

That means the law is not the same for all American citizens. He is getting a different punishment than another arbitrary American citizen doing the same offense.

According to a sibling comment the person in question was not naturalized. A US citizen can absolutely not be deported anywhere. They would have to be denaturalized first and the only grounds for involuntary denaturalization are having committed fraud in the naturalization process itself.

Off-topic question: India does not accept dual citizenship. So when the Kosuris became naturalized citizens, they must have given up their India citizenship. Given that, why should India accept them back after they were deemed criminals in their adopted country? What is the legality around revoking naturalized US citizenship?

Usually the way this works is that country A doesn't "recognise" dual-citizenship, which means if you are a citizen of country A and country B and you commit an offence in country A you don't get to say "well I am a citizen of country B so that doesn't apply to me". I am not sure if India requires you to give up your citizenship on taking another, but if they did it would make sense, and in fact it's surprising that that doesn't always happen. If a citizen of country A wants to become a citizen of country B instead fair enough but it's not in the interests of A or B that they should retain citizenship of A too.

India requires one to surrender the indian passport asap after acquiring any other citizenship

Good for them. It is baffling why others don’t do this. It doesn’t make sense on any level.

H1B has basically become a slavery visa for Indians. Similar to how the Indian government runs commercials warning Indians going to Gulf countries not to fall into employment related traps, it's hightime we educate Indians wanting to get h1b the issues associated with it. I don't expect American laws to change to make h1b workers life easier. But at least the current Trump administration seems to be targeting a lot of these companies that take advantage of the h1b employees, which is good.

And in all of the cases, they are Indians committing fraud to assist the immigration of other Indians.

Perhaps the simplest solution is to disallow Indian nationals from applying for H1B completely?

I think its generally problematic if one class of visa comes to be dominated by a single nationality. It does not result in diversity in the host country, for starters.

I think people would be more welcoming of the H1B visa (and expanding it, or offering more rights for those on it) if it wasn't completely dominated by Indian men. Perhaps rules limiting any one country to a maximum of 10% of the visa quota, and ensuring the intake is at least 60% female would assist public perceptions?

How would that be fair to Indian nationals that play by the rules?

There is a similar rule to what you propose in the Olympic Games. Max of 3 athletes from a given country in each track and field event. I always found that rule stupid and artificial. Potentially several of the top 10 athletes in the World can't compete just because of their country of origin.

Do you really want a race track full of Africans and Afro-Americans and throw field full of Scandinavians?

>Perhaps the simplest solution is to disallow Indian nationals from applying for H1B completely?

Wow, this is an incredibly racist and west-centric view.

Are you really going to exclude 17% of the world's population based exclusively on where they were born?

As an Indian, I would really like Americans to kick out all Indians so that they will stay in India and make India great. At least our children won't have to listen to such statements.

This is incredibly racist. This is exactly like the stupid Muslim ban by Trump. "Some x are/do y, so lets ban all x".